DISTRICT LEVEL LOBBY AND ADVOCACY WORKSHOP ON
RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT, 2005
Date: 10th and 11th March 2006, Venue: Hotel Jyoti Mahal, Rayagada
Orgd. by Utkal, Padampur in collaboration with CENDERET(XIM), Jeypore
DAY- 1: 10th of MARCH 2006
INAUGURAL SESSION:
At the outset a note of welcome was extended by Sri Sudarshan Padhy, President, Utkal to all the participants and guests present on the occasion. Then Sri Kishore Kumar Kiro, District Coordinator CENDERET (XIM), Rayagada speaking on the objectives of the Workshop told that despite several months since the RTI Act 2005 has been in force, the people at large are yet to know about anything of the sort. And those members of the public, who appear to know something about it, don’t in fact know its provisions in depth. As a result, we find that the very officialdom who should have by now learnt to behave in a transparent and responsive manner before the people under the impact of this new law, are going their old way caring a fig for the people. This is just a disconcerting phenomenon, which signaled us to organize the present Workshop on RTI Act 2005 involving people from cross-sections of the district, PRI representatives, NGOs, media persons, officials and intellectuals.
Then Sri Ratan Das, a veteran Sarvoday thinker formally inaugurated the Workshop by way of lighting the ceremonial candle, followed by a brief talk by him on the theme of the day. Admitting that he himself had not studied the RTI Act and Orissa Rules in detail, he observed that this new law appeared to be greatly promising and beneficial for the common people, but like so many progressive laws enacted in the past this one might just remain on pen and paper and become ultimately dysfunctional. Sri Das recounted the statement made by Collector Rayagada in course of his address to the women’s meeting held yesterday that only one application was submitted so far to the District Collectorate seeking information under the RTI Act, and that too by a Government servant. Quite sometime back, a Workshop on RTI was held at Padampur, where he (Sri Das) had the opportunity to attend. There too he had found that so many persons belonging to PRIs and SHGs, who had attended the event, were largely ignorant about the new law. So the point at issue was how can a progressive dispensation like the RTI Act or various welfare schemes of the Government can reach down to the marginalized people like Adivasis and Harijans living at grassroots level and be made use of by them. Despite so much hullabaloo made over Panchayatiraj in our country, the people here are still unable to make out the difference between a Palli Sabha and a Gram Sabha. Further it is regrettable that as much as 16,000 acres of Bhoodan land were handed over to Tahsildar at Gunupur for distribution among the landless poor, but still that task remained pending at Governmental level. And to cap it all, the people remain also callous about the whole thing.
Then coming to topic of the RTI, Sri Das said, the Application Form has been made so difficult and complex and the fee regime so high under the Orissa RTI Rules that a common man felt naturally inhibited in applying for information under the new law. Some days back he had a discussion with Prof. Radhamohan, the State Information Commissioner about the situation of RTI in Orissa and the Commissioner opined that a lot of dissemination works in the form of Seminars and Workshops across the State needed to be organized to spread the message of RTI. But now he (Sri Das) felt that besides such spadework for mass awareness, the Orissa RTI Rules deserved to be revised too for making it simple, affordable and easily accessible by the common people, as envisaged under the mother law. And the occasions like the present workshop should hopefully serve as a forum to debate and discuss the need for revising the said Rules, concluded Sri Das.
Sri P.K.Mohapatra, District Labour Officer-cum-PIO: Sri Mohapatra said that he was the PIO (Public Information Officer) of his Department for Rayagada district, while the Assistant Labour Officer the APIO. Then he said that the chief purpose behind his coming to this Workshop was to know what the people thought about his office. The RTI Act was enacted with the prime objective of checking corruption in Government offices, and it is no doubt a laudable objective in itself. But under the prevailing circumstances characterized by so many constraints and limitations, he felt somewhat helpless about how to do full justice to the need for implementing this new law at his departmental level. He was fully aware that some people pointed out the deficiencies in the State Rules made under the RTI Act, and hopefully these Rules would be revised in days to come in accordance with the intentions of the law-makers. Speaking about the status of RTI in his office, Sri Mohapatra said that not a single application for information has been received by his office so far. Then he briefly told the house about the 24 laws, the implementation of which is the main concern of his office. Most of these laws, which were made in pre-independence period by the British were still continuing ever since with little alteration here and there. The most important law among them is the Minimum Wages Act. Sri Mohapatra revealed that since the 1st of January 2006, the daily minimum wage in our State has been enhanced from Rs.52.50 to Rs.55/- as against 8 hours of work by an unskilled labourer. For a semi-skilled worker it is Rs.65/-, skilled Rs.75/- in place of Rs.72/-, and highly skilled Rs.85/-. Other important laws that his office dealt with concerned the immigrant laborers and child labourers. Anybody facing any problem in such matters can straightaway approach his office for necessary remedial action. Moreover, there being no secret matter dealt with by his office, anybody can seek any information from his office under the RTI law and he would be pleased to comply with such request readily.
Sri Nabin Padhy, a veteran journalist of the district thanked the organizers for holding the Workshop on a vital issue of the day like right to information. He opined that it would have been better if the provision would have been made under the new law to give all official information to the people free of cost. In a district like Rayagada where the bulk of inhabitants were Adivasis and Harijans, the proper implementation of RTI law is very much warranted. And an effective collaboration between the Government agencies and non-Government organizations can only ensure its proper implementation, hoped Sri Padhy in concluding his speech. He was followed by Sri Kirti Chandra Sahoo, a young journalist, who at the outset admitted that he was not aware about the details of the RTI Act or of the Orissa RTI Rules either. But one thing he felt sure about was that this new law could serve as a powerful tool in the hands of the poor Adivasis and Harijans to realize their rights and entitlements over land, water and forest resources, which bear critical significance for their life and livelihood. But the tragic fact, Sri Sahoo continued, was that such marginalized people themselves don’t raise voice about what they want from the State. Moreover, quite many of them who become a Sarpanch or even a Ward Member start egoistically projecting themselves as demigods, and thereby distance themselves from the rest of their folk. With such a boastful attitude developed in them, how can they champion the rights and needs of their poor brethren?, asked Sri Sahoo. Again, neither these Panchayat leaders nor the villagers are conversant with the laws and rules and regulations governing Panchayats. Thus it is a matter of great concern for all of us as to how to enable the leadership among the Adivasi and Harijan population in the district to be conscious and articulate about the rights and entitlements of their community vis-ŕ-vis bureaucratic State machinery.
Sri Rama Murty Gamango, former MLA Gunupur: Sri Gamango opined that the RTI if properly implemented would effectively check pilferage of the public money as happening currently through corrupt means, and as a result the poor people would receive the benefits of various welfare schemes as desired. Commenting on the malfunctioning of PRIs, Sri Gamango observed that due to the ignorance and incapacity of the Sarpanch, who is an elected representative, the Secretary of a GP, who is a mere employee is wielding more powers than the Sarpanch does. Thus the real issue is how to enable the elected representatives of PRIs to exercise the powers entrusted to them effectively and adequately. Then Sri Gamango observed that the details of implementation of any scheme should be displayed on a blackboard at the GP level, so that all the people are informed timely about all this and thus enabled to watch the performance of a scheme at each stage.
Sri Saroj Jena, OPDSC (Orissa Professional Development Service Consultant), Rayagda: Sri Jena observed that as per a Supreme Court decision, the right to information is a part of right to life. It is a fact that the entire Government is running on people’s money. Then why don’t we ask the administration about what they do or don’t do for us? As a student of law, he knows that so many laws which exist as of today including the Official Secrets Act 1923 were framed and enforced during British raj with the main intention of keeping us in dark about how they ruled over the people. And regrettably enough, despite the enactment of RTI both the administration and people are still stuck up in the obnoxious culture of secrecy. The main issue that therefore confronts all of us how to root out this culture of secrecy from our public life.
So far he knows, a journalist had applied for information to an office of ITDA under the RTI Act, but the PIO of the said office asked him to deposit a gigantic amount of Rs.41,500/- towards the price of the required information. Can a person obtain the information he wants by paying such huge fees? Moreover, whatever applications for information under the new law submitted so far have been made by well-off and litigant people, not by the common poor. Another irritant of the Orissa RTI Rules is that there is no provision under it to intimate an applicant about the detail break-up of the total amount he or she has to pay towards the cost of information wanted. Moreover, there is no scope for informing an applicant to know the status of his/her application, even if he or she receives no response from the concerned office for months on end.
Further as he knows, the RTI is basically meant to ensure transparency and accountability of the system of governance by way of facilitating people’s participation in its functioning. But what we find today about the attitude of the officials is just the same as before. Though they are called ‘public servants’, they continue to behave as if they are the masters of the public. If a common man visits an office, he is not offered even a seat, let alone necessary attention to his queries or grievances. Even the PRI leaders are not properly treated by the officials.
Sri Baidyanath Mohapatra, District Agriculture Officer, Rayagada: In his brief talk Sri Mohapatra told that the farmers of the district are yet to know that a new law in the shape of RTI Act 2005 has already come into force. He himself is the PIO of his office, and has received the training on operating RTI. As he knows, anybody desiring to obtain any information from his office should apply in the concerned Form alongwith the application fee of Rs.20/-. Then the office shall provide him/her with the information wanted within 30 days. No body has applied so far to his office for the purpose, but everybody is welcome to do that. Sri Mohapatra further told that adequate financial and technical provisions should made for the district offices to enable them to dispose of the requests for information properly and timely.
Sri Anjan Kumar Panda, Coordinator of PRI Project, CENDERET: Sri Panda shared his experience of the District level Workshops on RTI held recently at Gajapati, Malkangiri and Koraput during February and March this year. In course of each workshop, the participants, divided into some groups visited the various offices to seek information under the Act and got a mixed response. In every office under the State Government they visited, the groups were first told by the concerned officer to fill up the application form, pay an application fee and wait for 30 days to receive the information sought. But the members of each group argued that they didn’t want information under Section 6(1) for which the Application Form was meant, but wanted proactively disclosed information under Section 4, for which no application was necessary. Secondly, they argued that the Rule 2(1c) under Orissa RTI Rules that defined the ‘fee’ recognized only 3 kinds of fees i.e. under 6(1), 7(1) and 7(5) of the RTI Act, and left out undefined the fee under Section 4(4) of the Act, though the Section 27(2) had asked both Centre and State Governments to prescribe inter alia the fee under Section 4(4). Since the Orissa Rules has not prescribed any fee for information under Section 4, the said information should necessarily be made available free of cost as mandated under the Section 4(4) itself. As a result of such reasoned arguments, quite many offices covered by the groups provided the wanted information instantly and without insisting on any form to be filled up or any fee to be paid. In case of those offices, which refused to comply with the request for information under Section 4(4), the complaints were lodged by the respective groups before the Information Commission under Section 18, which required no format to be filled up nor any appeal fee to be paid as permissible under both Central and Orissa RTI Rules. In this way the groups of information seekers have been instrumental in getting the RTI Act in general and its Sections 4 and 18 operational at the level of both Central and State Government offices in the selected districts of South Orissa. Hopefully the current Workshop would prove helpful in furthering this ongoing drive.
In the abovesaid Workshops, another important issue was discussed too, that is, how far the Orissa Rules under the RTI Act were in correspondence with the mother Act. Through a comparative analysis of the Act and Rules, the participants could see through for themselves that the fee structure along with the procedure for application, intimation and rejection of a request for information as laid down under the Orissa RTI Rules were out of tune with the mandate of the Act and extremely unfavourable and inaccessible for the common people. So in every Workshop the participants raised the demand for a drastic revision of the Orissa Rules to bring it in conformity to the norms suggested under the mother Act. And further, the participants resolved among themselves that so long as the Orissa Rules would remain as it is, unaffordable by the common people, the people shall be encouraged and helped by the social activists to access the information they would want by using the Section 4(4) of the Act, instantly, free of cost and without having to make an application for it.
Sri Chitta Behera, Advisor to Orissa RTI Campaign
Speaking on the significance of the RTI Act 2005 Sri Behera said that it was like a master key, having the potential to address to any of the myriad, baffling problems and crises facing the country and its people as a whole. But the Act is not enough in itself to achieve the historic goals that have been assigned to it. Both the Central and State Governments have been asked under Section 27 of the Act to frame appropriate Rules for implementing the various provisions of the Act. Meanwhile the Centre and several States including Orissa have announced their respective Rules under the Act. But we notice a big difference between the manner in which the Act is being implemented at the Central level and in other States and the manner in which it is being implemented in Orissa. While the people have no great difficulty in accessing official information from public authorities under Central and other State Governments, they feel however greatly handicapped in the situation of Orissa, owing precisely to the ill-conceived and faulty set of Rules enforced by the State Government. Regrettably enough, the Orissa State Information Commission, an independent statutory body, which has the authority to suggest reform and recommendation in the State Rules as per the Section 25 of the Act has not only failed to exercise it, but also is actively lobbying with the intelligentsia in favour of the said Rules. That is why, the various civil society leaders and groups from within and outside the State have come forward to register their loud protest against the Orissa RTI Rules and are carrying forward a determined campaign for its replacement at the earliest by an appropriate set of Rules to be made in tune with the mother Act and based upon the public opinion.
Further commenting on the Orissa Rules, Sri Behera observed that while the principal Act [vide Section 7(5)] mandated the concerned Government at Centre or in a State to make the various fees ‘reasonable’, the State of Orissa has done just the opposite, by way of charging, for instance, a page of xerox at Rs.5/-, a page of computer print-out at Rs10/-, a CD or a Floppy at Rs.100/-, inspection for an hour at Rs.15/- and an application fee at Rs.20/-. This fee regime of Orissa is the highest of its kind in the country. Again, while the Act has not left any room for any appeal fees to be prescribed by any Government, the Orissa RTI Rules has fixed Rs.40/- as the fee for the 1st appeal and Rs.50/- as the fee for 2nd appeal. What does this fact indicate? The Government of Orissa, which is already debt-ridden and insolvent, is out to cash in on every damn occasion to extract as much revenue from the people as possible, caring a fig for the mandate of law or interest of the people. The unacceptable fees apart, the entire gamut of procedure suggested under the Orissa Rules that includes the forms for application, intimation, rejection and appeal etc. is simply designed to discourage the people at every step from exercising their right to information under the Act.
Moreover, the officials of the State Government and even the Information Commissioners are seen to be highlighting only the Section 6 of the Act, that requires a citizen to submit an application along with an application fee, wait for 30 days and pay additional fees on various counts, while keeping absolutely mum over the Section 4 of the Act that gives the unfettered right to a citizen to inspect any public office (vide Explanation to Section 4) and take a copy or extract of any document covered under 17 categories of information which are in the nature of proactive disclosures to be published by any public authority [Section 4(1b)], free of cost or only at the cost price of the print or medium [Section 4(4)]. The Section 4(2) clearly says that if every public authority can effectively disseminate all such information suo moto to the people, the people shall not feel inclined to take the help of other provisions of this law, that require money, time and other hassles, just to obtain the information they want. But ironically enough, the Government officers or Information Commissioners of the State in all their utterances keep harping only on the money-based, time-consuming and round-about procedures for seeking information. Thereby they want the people to remain in dark about the other wholesome mode of getting information instant, easy and cheap, available under the Act.
Since the State Rules on the procedure for application and appeal have proved utterly unaffordable for the common people, the Orissa Right to Information Campaign has therefore resolved to focus on the use of Sections 4 and 18 of the Act, respectively for obtaining information from any public authority, and in case of non-compliance by the latter, for lodging a straight complaint before the Information Commission. The Government officers and Information Commissioners of Orissa however keep on emphasizing the costly and round-about provision made under Orissa Rules for making an appeal under Section 19 of the Act, which requires a person to submit his/her appeal in a format, pay appeal fees, route the appeal to the Commission through the 1st appellate authority and wait for months on end, completely omitting from their discussion the provision under Section 18 of the Act that requires no format, no fees and no round-about procedure for making an appeal before the Commission.
Even going by the Orissa Rules, one has to submit no formatised application and no fees to obtain any information under Section 4 of the Act. The 11-column application form (Form A) recommended under Orissa Rules, as mentioned in its sub-title itself, is meant for a person who seeks information under Section 6(1) of the Act. So a person wanting information under Section 4 needn’t have to fill it up. Again, the Orissa Rules under Rule 4(1c) while defining the ‘fee’ has recognized only 3 kinds of fees [fees under Sections 6(1), 7(1) and 7(5) of the Act] omitting therefrom the fee under Section 4(4) of the Act, though the Section 27(2) of the Act had empowered each State to determine a fee under the Section 4(4). Thus it is fully justified on the basis of the Orissa Rules itself that a person seeking proactively disclosed information under Section 4 of the Act has to make no application and pay no fees and moreover has the right to inspect and obtain information sought instantly, since such information comes under the category of proactive disclosures by a public authority, which should have been kept ready for public view within 120 days of the enforcement of the Act i.e. by 12th of October 2005.
As a matter of fact, the groups of social workers have already proved successful in inspecting and obtaining information under Section 4 of the Act from different Central and State offices without any application made or fees paid and that too instantly, such as in Keonjhar, Pallahada, Parlakhemundi, Malkangiri and Koraput, just by way of their reasoned argumentation based on RTI Act and Orissa Rules before the concerned officials. If they could achieve it, why can’t the people in Rayagada won’t avail such a golden opportunity? The focus of the present Workshop should therefore be for the participants to learn and master the technique of driving any discourse on RTI to prove the sole point before the officials, i.e. a citizen has the right to inspect and obtain any information under Section 4 instantly, without submitting any application or fees.
POST-LUNCH SESSION:
The first part of the post-lunch session resumed the presentation by the participants on their experience of the practice of RTI by the public authorities in their respective spheres. Sri Ruturaj Patnaik of CENDERET (XIM) observed that their organization has been campaigning for RTI since long, even when the Act of 2005 had not come into force, and the debate around Freedom of Information Act 2002 was going on throughout the country. It is true that the current law is more powerful and citizen-friendly than its predecessor. Thus the present campaign for spread of the RTI Act or for setting aright the faulty set of Orissa Rules made under the Act should be viewed as a continuation of our previous campaign for RTI at grassroots level. Sri Manoj Swain of Aruni said that it was really a sad commentary on both administration and civil society groups that the crucial information about the enhancement of the minimum wage from Rs.52.50 to Rs.55/- w.e.f. 1st January ’06 which the District Labour Officer Rayagada disclosed on the floor of the Workshop just minutes ago is not known to most of our people till date. Similarly people are still in dark about the GP level planning that has been made if any under the NREGA, though the Government of Orissa have already started implementing the Act w.e.f. 2nd February ’06. And moreover, we also feel too cowardly to ask the officials about such information at the right moment. Sri Shyamalendu Padhy of Shakti opined that the villagers themselves don’t know what schemes have been sanctioned for their respective villages. Hopefully the RTI shall help them to know about all this. Sushree Sujata Mohapatra of OPDSC (Orissa Professional Development Service Consultant) Rayagada told that she quite some period back had heard that the Government of Orissa had made a provision for supply of a copy of any record of a Panchayat at Rs.2/- per page, but the said provision remained in cold storage ever since. She wanted to know, whether the current RTI law won’t suffer the same fate. Moreover, she wanted to know, if an official would refuse to provide the requested information, what remedial action was available under the new law. Sri Guru Charan Majhi, Sarpanch Liktipadar GP frankly told that he had come to attend the Workshop to know about the much talked about RTI. Sri Judhisthir Palka, Sarpanch Akhusingh GP wanted to know whether the PRI representatives in KBK districts could be empowered by using the RTI Act. Sri Pitambar Lima, Community Organiser of Utkal informed that he knew about as many as 1300 poor persons from Rayagada were languishing in Raipur prison in Chhatisgarh without bail, after being arrested by the police on this or that flimsy ground. He wanted to know whether the RTI Act would be of any help in expediting their release on bail or disposal of their cases. Sri Ashok Mishra of Young India observed that so far his knowledge went, the people who have submitted application for information have done so, only with a vindictive motive to harass others on the fabricated grounds of misappropriation of public funds. They have least concern for unraveling of real truth or fulfillment of any public interest. How to put a check on such frivolities that are often passed off in the name of right to information? Sri Kartikeswar Gumudani, Ward Member, Jatili GP opined that there were instances in which the people who got money, say for example, under Indira Awas Yozana spent it away after other purposes. Is there any way under RTI to check such cases of corruption by the people? Sri Rama Chandra Pradhan of Utkal, Padampur, Rayagada narrated at length his experience and views on RTI since he remained involved in the campaign for RTI over quite some time in the past. Earlier to the RTI Act, there was no definite mechanism to check and expose corruption by the people seated in high-up positions. Now the RTI law empowers a common citizen to share the meeting with the District Collector on any developmental issue. Beforehand the JE of a Block used to browbeat anybody who dared to ask him about the expenditure of a project. But now under the RTI regime he can’t do so. And if he ever refused to give the information asked for, one can complain against him directly before the Information Commission. Under the Act the officers of dubious character can be penalized too. Even the Police Station is now obliged under the law to disclose information to the public. One can ask for information about a past event too. On 23rd and 24th of February last, a two-day Workshop on RTI was held at Parlakhemundi, Gajapati where he received the practical training on how to approach a public office to get the desired information free of cost and without making an application. The current Workshop would certainly further widen and deepen his knowledge on RTI. Sri Kura Sahu, Secretary Nitai Gour Samskrutik Parishad, Padampur opined that not only for getting the information we want, but also to make use of the information so got, the young people should get organized. Sri Sudam Majhi of V.V.V.Club at Muski under Liktipadar GP said that the BDO was spreading confusion about the newly launched Scheme under NREGA, and we have to learn whether we can stop such confusion with the help of RTI. Sri Abani Tripathy, Coordinator ‘Shakti’ wanted to know whether the RTI could help the people of his area to fight out corruption from Ramanaguda Block, to which he belonged. Sri Naresh Mohapatra of CURE, Gajapati who was a participant in the RTI Workshop held on 23/24 Feb. 06 at Gajapati told that he and other co-activists came to learn certain new ideas from the last workshop they attended. Earlier they had the impression that one could get the official information only if they applied in a given form and paid the various kinds of fees fixed for the purpose. But in course of the last Workshop they realized that the information under the RTI Act could also be available without making any application or paying any fees. Soon after the last Workshop, the police officers at Gajapati contacted us and took the copies of RTI Act and Orissa Rules from our office. Some participants who were trained in the last Workshop could be able to collect thereafter some information related to the field of education from the concerned officials by using the RTI Act.
Orientation on Sections 4 and 18 vis-ŕ-vis Orissa Rules
Then a long session was held uptill the late evening for training and orienting the participants on how to argue out before a public authority for inspecting and obtaining any information instantly, free of cost and without making any application. Since there were 3 participants who didn’t know how to read or write, the focus of the entire discourse was addressed to them with the understanding that if they could follow what was being told, then others were supposed to follow the same automatically. The relevant extracts from the RTI Act and Orissa Rules were read out by some or other participant, followed by a discussion on its meaning and implications in popular Oriya, facilitated by the resource person Sri Chitta Behera.
First of all, it was told to them that whatever information one normally wants in day-to-day life is amply covered under some or other categories of information as mentioned under Section 4(1b) of the Act. For instance, if someone wants to know why a particular case for Indira Awas was not sanctioned in spite of the recommendation sent by the concerned GP in its favour, he or she should ask for inspection of the concerned files maintained against the point (xii) under Section 4(1b), which reads, “the manner of execution of subsidy programmes, including the amounts allocated and the details of beneficiaries of such programmes”. Then the ‘Explanation to Section 4’ was interpreted to mean that every public authority should from their side help any person visiting their office in connection with RTI to inspect the 17 categories of suo moto information as mentioned under Section 4(1b) of the Act without any hesitation. Then the opening sentence of Section 4(1b) was read out and explained to mean that every office should have kept ready all the 17 categories of information by the 120th day of the enactment of the Act i.e. by 12th of October 2005, since the day of the enactment was 15th of June 2005, the date on which the President assented the RTI Bill passed earlier in May 2005.
Then the Section 4(2) was interpreted to mean that the public authority should disclose so much information in the suo moto manner that the people would feel the least compulsion for resorting to making an application or appeal under the Act that involved the expense of time and money for obtaining information. The Section 4(3) has clearly said that every public authority should disseminate all their information in such a manner as to reach to the public easily. The Section 4(4) has stipulated that all such suo moto information shall be supplied to the public either ‘free or at such cost of the medium or the print cost price as may be prescribed’. Since the Rule 2(1c) under Orissa Rules while defining the fee has omitted the mention of ‘fee’ payable under Section 4(4), the other option shall hold good, i.e. all the suo moto information should be made available to the public free of cost. The Orissa Rule 2(2) also says that whatever couldn’t be defined therein, it shall have the same meaning as assigned under the mother Act. If any officer asks a citizen seeking information under Section 4, to apply in the Form A along with the specified fees, the concerned citizen should tell that officer that the Form A as its sub-title reads is meant for the request for information under Section 6(1), but not for Section 4(1b) of the Act. Similarly, the entire Schedule of Fees as appended to the Orissa Rules is applicable to Sections 6(1), 7(1) and 7(5) of the Act, as already evident from the definition of ‘fee’ given under Orissa Rule 2(1c), but not to the Section 4 of the Act. Then the Section 18(1) was read out and explained to mean that unlike the Section 19 whereby an aggrieved person is supposed to approach the first appellate authority before going to the Information Commission, the Section 18 empowers a citizen, if aggrieved by the refusal by a public authority, to lodge a complaint directly before the Commission. And he or she can lodge the said complaint on a plain paper without any fee to accompany. The Orissa Rules [vide Rule 2(1c) or Schedule] has not prescribed any fee for complaint under Section 18 either, though the Schedule has announced the fees for 1st and 2nd appeals, both covered under Section 19 of the Act. Moreover, it was pointed out to them that as per Sections 5(2) and 18(1) of the Act, the citizen’s Complaint under Section 18 was to be written by the concerned officer of the public authority himself for the purpose of being forwarded to the Information Commission. Section 6(1b) was read out and explained to mean that whenever a citizen is unable to write for some reason or the other, it is the duty of the PIO or APIO of the said office to reduce the oral narration by the concerned person into writing.
Towards the fag end of the session, the participants were asked as to whether they could argue out the case before the concerned officers for inspecting and accessing official information instantly without any application or without any fee as allowed under Section 4, and if need be, for getting their Complaints forwarded directly to the Information Commission through the concerned officers, as provided under Section 18 of the Act. They said ‘yes’, and then the session came to a close.
DAY-2: 11th of MARCH 2006
Tips on Complaint writing and miscellaneous matters:
At the start of the first session, Sri Chitta Behera pointed out how to write a Complaint under Section 18 to the Information Commission, centring round any grievance under the Act. The address of both Central and State Commissions was mentioned to them. The participants were further told that if any officer refused to write and forward the complaint for them, then they can write the complaint on their own. However in such cases, they can and should add another, fresh ground of complaint to the list of other grounds, i.e. refusal by the concerned officer to write and forward the complaint to the Commission in violation of Sections 5(2) and 18(1) of the Act.
The next tip that was pointed out to the participants was that they while seeking information under Section 4(1) of the Act should, as a matter of course, meet the head of a public authority, but not the PIO, who is in fact the authorized officer for dealing with applications under Section 6(1). If and when the head of a public authority happens to direct a citizen to meet the PIO for the explicit purpose of providing information under Section 4(1), then he/she can and should of course meet the PIO. If denied information or harassed in any manner by the PIO, the citizen should however lodge the complaint under Section 18 against the head of the authority, since the latter but not the PIO is accountable for supplying the information under Section 4(1).
Again, the participants were advised not to pick up any argument with clerks or subordinate staff of an office, since not they, but the officers as such are accountable under the Act for furnishing the required information. But the citizen can and should argue with any officer at length about the information required under the Act, since the Section 5 of the Act enjoins upon every office to appoint as many officers as required to provide the information under the Act to the members of the public.
Visit to the Offices by Information-seeking Groups:
All the participants were divided into 4 Groups, each group assigned with two offices, one under the Central Govt and the other under the State Government to be visited for inspection and obtaining of information under Section 4(1b). They were told either to bring the information sought or a copy of the complaint forwarded to the Information Commission for presenting it before the plenary meeting. The group-wise arrangement was made as follows:
Group-1: Huruchula Majhi, Sarpanch Liktipadar GP (Team leader), Padmabati Binjaka, Jagjit Panda, a journalist, Sudam Majhi, Lambodar Majhi, Chandan Shabar and Abani Tripathy.
Offices to be covered: Railway Station (Central Govt) and Electric Supply (State).
Group-2: Judhisthir Palka, a Sapanch (Team leader), Agata Binjaka, Nilakantha Rao, Pradip Jena, Gopi Shabar, Kailash Majhi, Ashok Shatpathy & Ramachandra Pradhan.
Offices to be covered: SBI (Central Govt) and Police Station (State)
Group-3: Kura Sahu (Team leader), Kartikeswar Gumdani, K.Kabiraj, M.Katraka, Rabana Nundruka, Sukadev Katraka and Sujata Mohapatra.
Offices to be covered: Telecom (Central Govt), P.H.E.D. and Veterinary Hospital (State).
Group-4: Ashok Mishra (Team leader), Pitambar Lima, Jugal Majhi, Gangadhar Lima, Ramachandra Mandangi, Rama Rao and Naresh Mohapatra.
Offices to be covered: Post Office (Central Govt) and Office of CDMO (State)
All the four groups left for their destination offices at around 11 AM and returned to the venue of the Workshop at around 2 pm.
Presentation by the Groups of their experience:
Following the mid-day lunch, all the participants got together for the sharing of group-wise experiences.
Group-1: At first they went to the Railway office at Rayagada and asked about the various railway concessions provided to the passengers belonging to SC and ST population in the year 2004-05. But the concerned officer replied that there was no such provision in Indian Railways. Then the Group asked, ‘How many concessions have been issued to senior citizens in the same year?’ The officer replied that this information was available in Waltair Office, and they have to bring it from there. The next question was asked, ‘What is the month-wise income of the Rayagada station during the year 2004-05?’. The officer showed a chart displaying the data on the said question, and asked the group to note down the same if they liked. Due to lack of time the group returned from there so as to visit the next office.
The group came to the office of Electricity, but found it closed on account of the 2nd Saturday. Then they went to the office of Minor Irrigation and found it closed too for the same reason.
Group-2: At first they visited the State Bank of India and asked the concerned officer, “How much loan has been sanctioned to the farmers in the year 2004-05?”. The officer replied that the SBI didn’t give such loans, and the ADB (Agriculture Development Bank) may be contacted for the purpose. The next question put was, “How much loan has been sanctioned to SHGs?”. The reply was that their Bank didn’t deal with SHGs either.
Then they came to the Office of CI (Circle Inspector) of Police, and found only a clerk sitting there. The group asked him, “How many cases of atrocities on women have been registered during January and February 2006?” The clerk replied that there was no officer present then to answer the question, and moreover the group should contact the Mahila Thana for the purpose. After sometime the OIC Sri Ashok Kumar Deo arrived, and being apprised of the question, asked the group to submit a written application in the given format mentioning the question therein. But the group explained that they had come to seek the said information under Section 4 of the Act, which required no application to be submitted. Then Sri Deo felt convinced and showed the concerned case register wherein it was found that only one case was registered on the ground of atrocity on women, during the last two months of 2006.
Group-3: The Group went to the office of BSNL and then to that of P.H.E.D., but found both closed on account of 2nd Saturday. Then they visited the office of Veterinary Hospital, where Dr.Surya Narayan Tripathy, the VS was then present. He was asked the question, “How much user fees has been collected during 2004-05?”. He first of all asked the group to submit a written application for the purpose. But the group told that they wanted information under Section 4 of the Act that required no application to be made. The VS felt convinced and looked for the Annual Report where such data were published. Since the Annual Report couldn’t be traced, Dr.Tripathy photocopied the relevant extracts (a total of 28 pages) from the concerned register and handed over the said data without demanding any fees.
Group-4: The Group first went to the office of CDMO, where except the Head Clerk no body was present and the said person pleaded his inability to give any data in the absence of the concerned officers. Then the group came to the Post Office and asked for the data on “Recurring Deposits, Withdrawal and Interest during the year 2004-05”. An officer present there asked the group to submit a written application for the purpose, and also gave a copy of the Application Form. But the group said that they wanted such information under Section 4 of the Act that required no application to be made. Then the concerned officer having felt convinced gave a one-page hand-written note duly certified by the Post Master, Rayagada. The said note contained however the data for 11 months of the above year, since the data for March 05 was not readily available.
Comments by Chitta Behera on group performances:
- Since the mainstream offices like the Collectorate, DRDA and Block remained closed on 2nd Saturday, the groups couldn’t visit them for collection of information. So any such programme planned to be held in future should be held on working days.
- Since all the officers showed a cooperative attitude overall towards the information seeking groups, there didn’t arise any ground for complaint under Section 18 of the Act.
- The participants should realize that if they were treated properly by the concerned officers even if the data asked for couldn’t be readily given, it was all due to the impact of the RTI Act 05. And if the participants continue such experiments of group visits in their respective areas involving the common people, then the officials and staffs in the various offices shall get tuned to the demands of the RTI Act and shall readily deliver the data asked for to any common man or woman.
- The experiment of the group visits to various offices seeking information once again proved beyond any shade of doubt that it was possible to inspect and collect information under Section 4 of the Act without having to make any application or pay any fees whatsoever.
ACTION PLAN:
- Block level, GP level and Village level Workshops through out Rayagada district to sensitise and train the PRI representatives and other social activists on RTI Act and Orissa Rules.
- Those participants of the Workshop who became conversant with the technique of accessing official information under Section 4(1b) of the Act without having to make any application or pay any fee should assist the common people in their respective areas in accessing the information they wanted in a similar manner.
The Resolution Passed:
Sri Sudarshan Padhy of Utkal moved a Resolution, which was unanimously passed by the participants. The Resolution read as follows:
“The political leaders, PRI representatives, media persons, NGO functionaries and other participants of the two-day ‘District level Workshop on lobbying and advocacy for Right to Information Act 2005’, organised at Rayagada on 10-11 March 2006 under the joint aegis of the NGOs ‘Utkal’ and ‘Shakti’ sponsored by CENDERET (XIM) have unanimously resolved as follows:
“1. The Orissa RTI Rules-2005 which is too complex, unaffordable and inaccessible for the common people of Orissa stands in need of drastic reform and its replacement by an appropriate set of Rules, to be framed on the basis of the public opinion, to suit the interest of the poor and Dalit people of the State and in consonance with the mandates of the mother Act.
“2. Since the Rule 2(1c) of Orissa RTI Rules-2005 has not mentioned any fee to be charged against the supply of proactively disclosed information covered under Section 4(1b) of the Act, any information under the said category should be made available to the people instantly and without any fees, as mandated by the Section 4(4) of the Act.”
“3. Until the Orissa RTI Rules-2005 is reformed in a manner suitable to the common people, there seems to be left only one alternative before them i.e. the people who want some or other information from a public authority of the State can inspect it instantly and without any fee to be paid as per ‘Explanation to Section 4’ of the Act and collect certified copies of the documents so inspected, free of cost as per the Section 4(4) of the Act. The Workshop calls upon the people to make wide-scale and constant use of such beneficial provisions of the RTI Act 2005.”
Valedictory Address:
Sri Bhagirathi Gamango, a former MLA and a former Minister in Government of Orissa gave the valedictory address of the Workshop. Sri Gamango encouraged the organizers and participants to put the lessons learnt into practice and organize more of such events at Block and GP level throughout the district of Rayagada and mobilize thereby the tribals and other Dalit sections of population to avail the immense benefits promised by the RTI Act 05.
The vote of thanks was offered by Sri Abani Kumar Tripathy of ‘Shakti’ to the Chief Guest Sri Bhagirathi Gamango for his valedictory address, to the Resource Person Sri Chitta Behera for his lessons on RTI Act and Orissa Rules, to all the participants who actively and enthusiastically got involved in both theoretical and practical sessions of the Workshop, to Sri A.K.Panda and K.K.Kiro of CENDERET (XIM) for their valuable presence and contribution and above all to Sri Sudarshan Padhy of Utkal and other co-organisers of Shakti for making appropriate arrangements for success of the programme.